Posted on 02/09/2007 11:14:39 AM PST by Lorianne
Living in a “red” state appears to be more hazardous to the health of millions of American children, according to startling data contained in a major new book, “Homeland Insecurity… American Children at Risk” available free to parents, policymakers and other concerned Americans. The factors weighed in the “Homeland Insecurity” ranking includes such diverse indicators as inadequate pre-natal care, lack of health care insurance coverage, early death, child abuse, hunger and teen incarceration.
Based on a diverse range of 11 child-related statistical measures, nine of the 10 top states with the best outcomes for children today are “blue” states (Wisconsin, Iowa, New Jersey, Washington, Minnesota, Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and #1-ranked New Hampshire, with Iowa being the sole “red” state in the group) and all 10 of the bottom states with the worst outcomes for children are “red” states (Wyoming, Georgia, Arkansas, Alabama, South Carolina, Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Louisiana and, in last place, Mississippi).
The political dividing lines used in the book are “red” states (those that voted Republican in the 2004 presidential election) versus “blue” states (those that voted Democratic). “Homeland Insecurity … American Children at Risk” outlines a $500 billion “Invest in Kids” agenda to reverse the harmful impact of conservative ideology on children caused by the failure to invest in documented children’s needs and by federal and state cuts in taxes and children’s programs beginning in the early 1980s and accelerating since 2001.
Michael R. Petit, author of “Homeland Insecurity… American Children at Risk,” and founder of Every Child Matters, said: “The bottom line here is that where a child lives can be a major factor in that youth’s ability to survive and thrive in America. The reason why this is the case is no mystery: ‘Blue’ states tend to tax themselves at significantly higher levels, which makes it possible to reach more children and families with beneficial health, social and education programs. ‘Red’ states overwhelmingly are home to decades-long adherence to anti-government and anti-tax ideology that often runs directly contrary to the needs of healthy children and stable families.”
Joel J. Alpert, MD, professor and chairman emeritus, Boston University School of Medicine, and past president, American Academy of Pediatrics, said: “It is unconscionable for policymakers and parents to allow two very different Americas to exist today for our children. Currently, millions of American children are without health insurance, millions are reported abused and neglected, millions are left unsupervised everyday after school, and millions have parents in a prison system that is crushing families. Many programs such as the State Child Heath Insurance Program and Head Start serve only a fraction of eligible children. We can and must erase the differences that exist today for children in ‘red’ and ‘blue’ states.
How serious is it for many children today in “red” states? The “red”/”blue” state dividing line is clear on issue after issue cited in “Homeland Insecurity”:
A child in the bottom 10 states is twice as likely to die by the age of 14 as are children in the top 10. All 10 of the bottom states of this measure are “red” states. All of the top 10 states are “blue” states. Children in the bottom 10 states are 1.8 times as likely to be uninsured as children in the top 10. Nine of the 10 states in the bottom of this measure are “red” states. Eight of the top 10 states are “blue” states. Children in the bottom 10 states are seven times more likely to die from abuse and neglect as are children in the top states. Nine of the 10 bottom states of this measure are “red” states. Eight of the top 10 states are “blue” states. A child in a bottom-10 state is more than twice as likely to be living in poverty as a child in a top-10 states. All of the 10 states in the bottom are “red” states. Six of the top 10 states are “blue” states. Women in the bottom 10 states are more than twice as likely to receive inadequate prenatal care as women in the top 10 states. Eight of 10 states in the bottom of this measure are “red” states. Seven of the top 10 states are “blue” states. Juveniles in the bottom 10 states are almost two and a half times as likely to be incarcerated as juveniles in the top 10. Eight of the 10 bottom states of this measure are “red” states. Seven of the top 10 are “blue” states. Children in the bottom 10 states are 74 percent more likely to die before their first birthday as are children in the top 10. Eight of the 10 states in the bottom of this measure are “red” states. Seven of the top 10 states are “blue” states. In order to illustrate the huge gap between “red” and “blue” states, the new book points to the serious circumstances facing more than a million children today in one of the crucibles of “compassionate conservatism”: Texas. The Lone Star state has the highest percentage of uninsured children in the nation (24.6 percent v. 15.7 percent nationally), the fourth worst rate of immunizing two year-olds (75 percent v. 84 percent nationwide) and a teen birth rate that is 50 percent higher than the national average. There are more uninsured children in Texas (1.24 million) than there are in 26 other states combined, including such large-population states as Oregon, Minnesota, Louisiana, Colorado and Wisconsin. Texas also ranks #1 in both child abuse deaths and the percentage of households experiencing “food insecurity” (16.4 percent versus 11.4 percent nationwide).
Sarah M. Greene, president and CEO, National Head Start Association, said: “I am pleased to see that the author correctly recognizes the danger posed to American children and, in fact, our nation in general by dwindling support for head start programs that target America’s most at-risk children in order to get them ready to learn in school. We wholeheartedly endorse the portion of the ‘Homeland insecurity’ that calls for full-scale national/state-level support for early childhood education … including full funding of Head Start.”
Elizabeth J. Clark, PhD, ACSW, MPH, executive director, National Association of Social Workers, Washington, D.C., said: “The statistics that Mike Petit cites in ‘Homeland Insecurity’ are borne out in our work every day as social workers. Social workers are the women and men who are charged with working with children and their families in direct care and through national and state legislative advocacy. Social workers make an investment in our nation’s children. We call on the government to make that same investment. Social workers are partners with educators and medical personnel to make positive changes in children’s lives and we implore lawmakers to make their well-being the centerpiece of the 2008 elections and beyond.”
“Homeland Insecurity” outlines a 10-year, $500 billion “Invest in Kids” agenda to improve the life chances of all U.S. children, regardless of where they live. This important new book is available on the Web at http://www.everychildmatters.org. Among the investments proposed:
Child Health. Create a universal children's health insurance program similar to Medicare for the elderly - Over 8,000,000 children do not have health insurance and millions more are at risk of losing their coverage. Combining and expanding Medicaid, S-CHIP, and employment-based insurance is achievable. The Every Child Matters Education Fund opposes any attempt by the Administration and Congress to cut or block grant the Medicaid entitlement. Child Abuse. Intensify federal efforts to reduce child abuse and neglect - Nearly three million reports of child abuse and neglect are made annually. Proven programs exist to prevent and treat child abuse, a widespread problem that contributes to many other social ills. The Every Child Matters Education Fund opposes any attempt by the Administration and Congress to block-grant the Title IV-E foster care program. After-School Programs. Promote after-school programs that provide learning activities and connect kids with caring adults - After-school programs have been shown to help prevent crime, drug use, and teen pregnancy. Millions of unsupervised children and teens would benefit. The 21 Century Community Learning Centers program has not seen an increase in federal funding in three years, resulting in fewer and fewer children being served. The Every Child Matters Education Fund supports a substantial increase in funding for after-school programs. Pre-School Education. Ensure that every child, regardless of income or background, has access to high quality pre-school education - Millions of eligible three and four year-olds are not enrolled in quality pre-kindergarten programs that can help prepare them for school. The Every Child Matters Education Fund opposes any effort by the Administration in Congress to block grant or cut funding for Head Start and supports universal access to pre-school education for 3 and 4 year olds. Working Families and Taxes. Extend the child tax credit to the working poor - Currently, families that make between $10,500 and $26,500 per year, even though they pay federal payroll taxes, do not receive the $1,000 per child credit that families with higher incomes receive. Extending tax cuts to these families will help lift them from poverty and simply show fairness as trillion of dollars in tax cuts have gone to more fortunate individuals.
Excellent point. It is hard for children to suffer from obesity, violence or a lack of health insurance when they are killed before they are born.
At least more red state kids get a fighting chance.
Red states are more likely to be in the South where there are large numbers of poor blacks and whites who are more likely than wealthy white liberals to exhibit outwardly pathological behavior.
Thats not to say these well to do libs are virtuous or "better" but they can afford to hire therapists and "life coaches"for their wayward offspring much easier than someone in the Miss.Delta or hills of Arkansas.
I can tell you unequivocally, if the blue counties in Mississippi were removed, Mississippi would be in the top ten of healthy youths. Jackson and the Delta up to Memphis have the problem that drags the entire state down....diversity has its downside...
Yeah and Georgia has Peachcare. It ticks me off that a woman I know could get healthcare from her husbands job and she could also buy it...she gets stipend, but she'd rather spend the money (not wisely either) and her son is on Peachcare which is supposed to be for low income kids with no opportunity to get health insurance. Many of the uninsured don't choose to purchase it.
This is a classic case of ignoring the real root cause and assigning a root cause that is convenient to the argument.
Almost any idiot can see a trend here.
These "bad" states are mostly southern states with the highest numbers of illegal immigrants. Illegal immigration probably has a higher correlation to these problems than political affiliation.
Secondly, just how "red" or "blue" are some of these states anyway? NM has a Democrat governor as does Louisiana, several states in the "Blue" category have republican governors and/or legislatures.
Often, the trends today are a reflection of political decisions of many previous administrations, the majority of which were predominantly "Blue" in the "bad" southern states over the past 50 years.
The real test would be to see kids of which party have the highest rates of the same maladies nation-wide. I think we know the answer here.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.-Benjamin Disraeli
They left the children that are in pieces in the trash out of the survey in the Blue states didn't they?
______________________________________________________
Was your research hands on?
I agree, it is a dangerous book. I am hoping the "statistics" in this book can be accurately refuted.
It seems to take a snapshot (one election) and impose that as the baseline got ills of poverty. Poverty does not occur in a short sequence snapshot time frame. The author's strategy seems dubious to me, but I'm not a statistician. I'm hoping someone more learned than me will refute the premise.
Yep!
This article is a classic example of selecting the evidence which supports a predetermined position and ignoring anything to the contrary.
PS, the reason for the article lies in the quotes:
Sarah M. Greene: “I am pleased to see that the author correctly recognizes the danger posed to American children ... We wholeheartedly endorse the portion of the ‘Homeland insecurity’ that calls for full-scale national/state-level support for early childhood education … including full funding of Head Start.”
Elizabeth J. Clark: “... We call on the government to make that same investment. ... we implore lawmakers to make their well-being the centerpiece of the 2008 elections and beyond.”
The book Homeland Insecurity: outlines a 10-year, $500 billion “Invest in Kids” agenda to improve the life chances of all U.S. children, regardless of where they live
These "bad" states are mostly southern states with the highest numbers of illegal immigrants.
Secondly, just how "red" or "blue" are some of these states anyway?
Often, the trends today are a reflection of political decisions of many previous administrations
Also, many red states are more rural where certain kinds of risk are more prevalent and access to care may be more difficult. The book apparently doesn't consider many risks which are associated with urban environments.
Also, many red states are more rural where certain kinds of risk are more prevalent and access to care may be more difficult. The book apparently doesn't consider many risks which are associated with urban environments.
Bingo! Each environment has its own set of risks to children as well as adults.
I'm old enough (59) to remember the "War on Poverty"
there was definitely less poverty BEFORE that war
nothing has been as destructive to American society as the socialist intervention of big government
I guess they forgot that New Hampshire, which they rank as #1 among the 'Blue' states has one of the lowest tax burdens of any state -- no income tax, and no sales tax, and a "decades long..anti-government and anti-tax ideology". Why even Democratic politicians in this state promise never to support an income tax.
Somehow I can't imagine that they are going to recommend that other states adopt the policies of the state that they rank as #1.
That's what I say and their point is? Possibly that we should come over to the slavery side eventually die early for it.
I'm sure if they threw aborted babies into the mix, it would change those statistic...if the statistics are even credible to begin with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.